Ries v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
| Robert Ries |
| Union Pacific Railroad Co. |
| 0:2020cv02647 |
| December 22, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| Hildy Bowbeer |
| Eric C Tostrud |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 18, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
TEXT ONLY ENTRY: ORDER granting #9 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Joseph P Sirbak, II for Union Pacific Railroad Co. Approved by Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer on 2/18/2021. (NAH)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Joseph P. Sirbak, II. Filing fee $ 100, receipt number AMNDC-8497583 filed by Union Pacific Railroad Co.. (Jacobsen, Cassandra) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER SETTING PRETRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 3/31/2021. Pretrial Conference set for 4/7/2021 at 02:15 PM by Conference Bridge (no courtroom) before Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer on 2/16/2021. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(LNP)
|
| Filing 7 RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Parent corporation, publicly held corporation or wholly-owned subsidiary reported for Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Co.. (Jacobsen, Cassandra) |
| Filing 6 ANSWER to Complaint filed by Union Pacific Railroad Co.. (Jacobsen, Cassandra) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Robert Ries. Union Pacific Railroad Co. served on 1/5/2021, answer due 1/26/2021. (Pederson, Neil) |
| Filing 4 (Text-Only) NOTICE - Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer's Practice Pointers, which have been recently revised, are available on the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota's #website. All parties are expected to be familiar with and adhere to these Practice Pointers, including any variances from Local Rules. (JMK) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Union Pacific Railroad Co. (MMP) |
| Filing 2 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: CLERK'S NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Eric C. Tostrud per 3rd 4th Civil Rights list, referred to Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. Please use case number 20-cv-2647 (ECT/HB). (MMP) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Union Pacific Railroad Co. (filing fee $ 402, receipt number AMNDC-8334029) filed by Robert Ries. Filer requests summons issued. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Pederson, Neil) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Ries v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Co. | |
| Represented By: | Joseph P Sirbak, II |
| Represented By: | Cassandra Jacobsen |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Robert Ries | |
| Represented By: | Neil Daniel Pederson |
| Represented By: | James H Kaster |
| Represented By: | David E Schlesinger |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
